Skip to main content

About your Search

20121205
20121213
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7
: domestic spending cuts is on the table for the fiscal cliff talks. two different perspectives for you here. isabel sawhill, brookings institution. brookings center on children and families. james capretta ethics and public policy center and visiting scholar at aei. let me begin with you. are these potential domestic cuts under sequestration devastating or manageable? >> guest: somewhere in between. not a good idea. they would be very deep cuts, you know, an 8% cut across the board is a very significant one-time cut for any program to sustain in immediate year period. so they're not a good idea. would it be the end of the world, no? >> host: what do you mean by that? >> guest: well, i mean there would be downsizing of a lot of services across the government in terms of the domestic accounts. so it would be fewer services being provided. there would be reduced federal employees. some grant programs would take a haircut of five, 10%. so there would be downsizing of the services provided by the federal government. but the economy would go on and the government would go on and the public would
past the fiscal cliff, use automatic spending cuts to make sure taxes don't go up, at least on the great majority and then figure out what to do about the upper brackets, and if that is -- that would be a mechanism that would guarantee further action next year and as is very well possible they would disagree next year and there would be some sort of trigger or punishment for their lack of action. that sounds relatively simple, putting it all together could take at least a couple weeks after you have a deal, there could be some inevitable blow ups from conservatives in the house for the senate so a lot of it is speculation. secondly, a lot of of things that might go in this down payment, farm subsidy cuts, there is a proposal to make federal retirees--federal workers pay more towards their retirement, that can get pretty political pretty quickly. it is very much in flux. all of that presupposes they get an agreement. there is a school of thought that they can't get an agreement until after tax rates actually go. >> host: andrew taylor is with the associated press. does the yo
in mandatory across-the-board spending cuts over one year, to drag our nation over the so-called fiscal cliff. what those tax increases mean to an average american family of four earning $50,000 a year is over $2,000 in higher income taxes. add to that expiration of the alternative minimum tax patch, new taxes mandated by the federal health care bill, and the reinstatement of the death tax, which will impact the next generation of farmers, ranchers, and small business owners, which americans will see the largest tax increase in the history of our country. if all of this happens, the congressional budget office predicts the nation's economy will shrink next year and the unemployment rate could rise again. in other words, we go back into recession. i believe we can avoid the fiscal cliff and address our massive deficit but that requires doing three essential things: reforming our tax code, reforming entitlement programs, and better controlling our spending. we can get additional revenue by reforming our tax code. that means closing loopholes and limiting deductions. by closing loopholes and lim
this fiscal cliff. that's the convergence of higher tax rates and, of course, all the spending. >> both parties, democrats and the republicans need to come together. >> the our three branches of government, and congress, and the president are equal. and pretty much neither one has the right position for the country. >> i know that america is going to be a great country again. and that will fix the problems we have at home, and bring together the two parties that are dividing the country, and fighting for different things. i know that this is going to happen. >> we're only going to get out of this together. we're not going to get out of it as a democrat. we're not going to get out of it as republican. we're going to get out of it as an american. >> thank you, ed. thank you, joan. we're going to get on with a program right now. let the introduce the moderator of that program, ron brownstein. on its editorial director of the "national journal," which means he oversees all the little coverage coming out of our company. he writes a weekly column for "national journal." is regularly on cnn an
the fiscal cliff today. so there are serious concerns on my side of the aisle that any agreement we reach will result in immediate tax hikes but promise spending -- promised spending cuts never occurred. we need more than just empty promises from the other side. the president and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle need to get serious about looking at the spending side. it's time for the president to make good on his campaign promise of supporting his words balanced approach to deficit reduction. let me repeat what i said at the beginning. all we have heard for three or four weeks now since the election is all about taxes. in fact, too often, that's what republicans are talking about, although they have got to be considered now as a result of the election. but if we give the president everything he wants in the sense of the -- taxing the wealthy, with the figures he wants, still runs the government only for eight days. what about the other 357 days? it only takes care of 7% of the deficit problems we face year after year after year and it's going to be year after year after year
in a balanced agreement, he's not particularly interested in avoiding the fiscal cliff, and he's clearly not interested at all in cutting any spending. what the president is really interested in, as we learned just yesterday, is getting as much taxpayer money as he can, first, by raising taxes on small business that he believes are making too much money and then on everybody else, not so he can lower the debt or the deficit but so he can spend to his heart's contefnlts for months the president has been saying all he wants is to raise taxes on the top 2% so he can tackle the debt and the deficit. however, yesterday he finally revealed that's not really his true intent. by demanding the power to raise the debt limit whenever he wants, by as much as he wants, he showed what he's really after is assuming unprecedented power to spend taxpayer dollars without any limit at all. this isn't about getting a handle on deficits or debt for him. it's about spending even more than he already has. why else would he demand the power to raise the debt limit on his own? by the way, why on earth would we e
as we come to the year end that we have a major deal which we must have on the fiscal cliff that we also include the farm bill. because with the farm bill we save $23 billion over what we've been spending the last few years. so let's get to work and get this done. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. i ask unanimous consent that the following members of senator baucus' staff be granted floor privileges during the consideration of h.r. 6156. that would be lisa pearlman, rebecca nolan, owen hockey and dan rusk. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. klobuchar: i yield the floor and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. reed: i ask that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reed: i ask unanimous consent a dealee to the committee on banking, housing and urban affairs, katharine topping be granted floor privileges for the remainder of this session. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reed: thank you. we all
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7